United States Gemini Program

 Quarterly Review

of

 The Gemini Near Infrared Spectrograph

 (GNIRS)

 

Held June 13, 2001 at Tucson, Arizona


Distribution

AURA President
NOAO Director
Gemini Head of Instrumentation
US Project Scientist
US Project Manager
Instrument Team Manager


USGP Report of the Quarterly Review for GNIRS

 June, 2001

 

 

1. Meeting Background

 

A USGP Quarterly Review (QR) of GNIRS was held on June 13, 2001. The meeting was attended by Taft Armandroff (US Project Manager) and Mark Trueblood (Work Package Manager) from the USGP, and members of the GNIRS team including Neil Gaughan (GNIRS Project Manager), Jay Elias (Instrument Scientist), and Dan Eklund (GNIRS Project Assistant). Others attending were Dan Weedman (NSF) by telecon, and Jeremy Mould (Director, NOAO).

 

The goal of the QR’s is to evaluate each instrument project's progress in a number of different areas, with emphasis on management and high-level concerns. Specifically, the USGP uses a formal mechanism to determine whether a project is on track with respect to budget and schedule, and to identify potential problems before they significantly impact progress.  

 

2. Major Findings

 

Overall, the project is approximately 2 months behind the current schedule, about the same as the previous QR. The Pre-Ship Acceptance Test continues to be scheduled to be complete in late summer of 2002 (now noted as August instead of September on the schedule). The main area behind schedule remains mechanical design, for the reasons noted in previous QR reports, but the focus of both attention and the source of new problems has shifted to fabrication, as would be expected of a project at this mature stage.

 

The projected delivery date has not changed significantly in the last two years, despite considerable refinement of the design, updates to the schedule based on the details of the current design, and now being past the mid-point of fabrication of parts. At the last QR, the accuracy of some initial cost and schedule estimates for fabrication was verified. At this QR, it was noted that these estimates have continued to hold for the most part, though the final cost estimate did rise by about $250k, with roughly half due to an increase in labor, and half due to increased capital for outsourced fabrication required by a delay in ramping up to the full complement of instrument makers in the NOAO shop assigned full-time to GNIRS.

 

The estimated cost increased from the March QR value of $3.9 million to $4.2 million, the latter value being the original estimate in January, 1999. At no point since the Restart Review has the estimated cost at completion exceeded $4.3 million.

 

Since the last QR, the team has achieved the following project status:

 

 

The USGP estimates that the GNIRS team can meet their current schedule despite their being slightly behind schedule at this point in time, provided:

 

(a)    the GNIRS team is able to schedule around the inability of IGPO to deliver the OIWFS components by the end of CY2000

(b)   the final BaF2 lens is delivered on schedule in August, and

(c)    IGPO delivers the NOAO flexure rig no later than December 31, 2001 (assuming a month for installation and test before first use in February).

These are serious issues that will be reviewed at the next QR, which will be held in late September. In particular, the extremely late delivery of the OIWFS jeopardizes the full utility of the instrument. This situation was noted by Dan Weedman/NSF, who requested that the GNIRS team develop an alternate plan in case the OIWFS is not available by the time it hits the Critical Path in August.

3. Project Summary

 

3.1 Project Overview and Key Accomplishments

 

The key accomplishments since the last QR have been:

 

·        Completed most 3D design activities, with about half the fixed assemblies remaining for 3D design; the team expects to complete 3D design by the end of June

·        Completed fabrication of all but two mechanisms

·        Completed dewar cold station PCB fabrication

·        Began electronics thermal enclosure wiring

·        Completed roughly half of software fabrication, bringing the total software coding to 90% complete for the components controller, and 70% complete for the EPICS code, which is on schedule

·        Janos delivered all but one of the BaF2 camera lenses; the one lens not delivered was broken while cooling after coating. Janos is expediting remaking the lens, with delivery set for August.

·        An order was placed for the Wollaston prism, with delivery expected in August. Although the undersized prism vignettes the field by about 23% (77% of the light gets through), IGPO accepted this as the best option.

3.2 Project Status and Plans

 

The GNIRS project is about 2 months behind the current schedule.

The following goals for this June, 2001 QR that were met are (some of these are from previous QR’s):

·        Complete dewar cold station PCB fabrication

·        Have all optics on order (including flats, prisms, grating replicas); the BaF2 issue may not be resolved by February, but an action plan should be in place.

·        All optics on order or delivered

The following goals for this June, 2001 QR that were not met are (some of these are from previous QR’s; goals have been combined for clarity):

·        OIWFS  integration. IGPO did not deliver the OIWFS components per Amendment 4 of the GNIRS Work Scope by September 5, 2000 and still has not delivered the parts. The GNIRS Project Manager will develop a contingency plan when the OIWFS hits the Critical Path in August.

·        Release rotary prototype report. Writing the report was placed at a lower priority than other work, but the results were incorporated into the design.

·        Release linear prototype report. Writing the report was placed at a lower priority than other work, but the results were incorporated into the design.

·        Complete lens delivery and acceptance testing. As noted above, Janos broke the one remaining lens and is expediting its delivery, which is scheduled for August.

·        Fabricate all three benches. The OIWFS bench is done, the Post-Slit Bench is 69% complete overall (including design), and the Pre-Slit Bench fabrication is 81% complete.

·        Complete fabrication of all mechanisms. All but 2 of the 9 mechanisms have basic parts fabrication complete.

·        Complete 3D design of all fixed assemblies. 10 of 19 fixed assemblies have 3D design complete.

·        Complete 2D design of all fixed assemblies. This should be complete by the next QR.

·        Complete dewar warm-up controller fabrication. The start of this activity has been rescheduled.

·        Complete electronics thermal enclosure fabrication. Component Control Thermal Enclosure internal harnessing is well under way, and should be complete by the end of June.

·        Complete dewar to electronics thermal enclosure cabling fabrication. The design is complete, and fabrication is waiting for final dimensions. This should be complete by the next QR.

By the next review, nominally scheduled for late September, the Project Manager plans to: 

·        Complete 3D design of all fixed assemblies

·        Complete 2D design of all fixed assemblies

·        Complete fabrication of all mechanisms

·        Complete fabrication of all benches

·        Complete fabrication of the bulkhead assembly

·        Complete fabrication of most dewar components (radiation shields and shells but not mounting trusses or cryo head hardware)

·        Complete 75% of mechanism and optical subassembly testing

·        Receive all optics

·        Complete dewar to electronics thermal enclosure cabling fabrication

·        Complete electronics thermal enclosure fabrication and checkout

·        Complete initial software coding

·        Final Component Controller software testing will be in process

·        Complete OIWFS components integration/test; if not, have a contingency plan in hand

In addition, at the next QR the USGP would like to see a discussion of plans for documentation, particularly concerning the Acceptance Test Plan, which had a payment milestone of $50,000 due March 1, 2001.

Milestones from previous QR’s that are open, but that are not on the Project Manager’s list for the next QR are:

·        Release rotary prototype report

·        Release linear prototype report

·        Complete dewar warm-up controller fabrication (this task was rescheduled for later in the program when the warm-up controller would be needed)

The Project Manager has reported the Systems Engineering effort as 100% complete for several months, yet the prototype reports remain undelivered. The USGP agrees that generating these reports was a lower priority than the other activities of the systems engineering staff to date. However, an important function of any team building Gemini instruments is sharing information gained from testing with other teams, so the work of the team will not be deemed complete by USGP when the instrument is delivered until these reports are written and delivered.

The project is 66% complete from the Restart Review to the completion of the Pre-Ship Acceptance Test, now scheduled for August, 2002.

3.3 Project Problems and Concerns

 

The Project Manager noted the following items that he is watching closely:

 

The USGP considers the Project Manager capable of dealing with most of these situations within NOAO. The OIWFS situation will require close cooperation with IGPO and the vendor. The status of these items will be reviewed at the next QR.

One item the Project Manager discussed, but did not flag as a concern, was the “rolling wave” of personnel requirements, which appeared in curves of headcounts versus time at previous QR’s. The curve presented at this QR shows personnel requirements ramping up quickly during the summer of 2001. This appears to be a continuing problem in the MS Project schedule that was apparently resolved in the past by use of outsourcing to make up the difference in personnel, much of which was in instrument makers. Although the personnel ramp-up appears not to be a problem, the resource over-scheduling that leads to outsourcing could lead to a large cost overrun. Furthermore, it is not clear if the curve shown at the QR is an artifact of the MS Project scheduling tool, or whether that tool is attempting to teach us something about the project that we are ignoring. Therefore, USGP recommends that the project look carefully at the source of this personnel ramp-up and determine (a) if it is real, and (b) what effect, if any, it will have on the instrument delivery date and the Actual Cost at Completion.

Items noted last time that are no longer of concern are:

 

3.4 Project Schedule

 

The summary-level project schedule is available on the GNIRS Web site (a copy is attached to this report). An analysis of the schedule performance of each major engineering discipline appears below. The Critical Path was deliberately designed so that no single mechanism could delay the instrument until System Integration. Instead, it includes various steps in most of the mechanisms.

 

3.5 Project Milestones, Cost, and Manpower Charts

 

A summary-level Microsoft Project schedule is attached as an appendix. This reporting category is not repeated for each work area below, since all work areas are represented in the project schedule and manpower charts. The manpower charts were presented in the handouts and will not be repeated in this report.

 

3.6 Project Budget and Expenditures to Date

 

The cost of the project is estimated to be $6.3M, including the $2.4M spent between the project start in October, 1995 and December 31, 1998. As of the QR, the project had spent a total of $4,899,404 against a planned value of $5,343,629 yielding an underrun of $444,225. Most of the underrun is in labor, primarily in Mechanical in the area of fabrication. Increased capital costs for sending parts to outside machine shops did not completely offset the lack of instrument makers available to the project, in part because the project is slightly late with having drawings ready for fabrication. USGP expects this underrun to be spent in accordance with the Project Manager’s projections. The estimated cost of the project has not exceeded $6.5M since early 1999.

 

3.7 Organization

 

The project appears to be staffed with a sufficient number of competent staff, except in the areas of design drafting. The project now has the full complement of four instrument makers, but very soon two of these will be required for mechanism and subsystem assembly, and later, system assembly, so they will not be used for parts fabrication, requiring more parts than originally planned to be sent outside for fabrication. This increases the burden on procurement as well as the engineering staff for oversight.

 

Furthermore, each key engineering position is only one deep, so when a person leaves the project, no immediate replacement is usually available to fill the gap. At this late stage of the project, loss of an engineer would ensure a delay in the delivery date, perhaps of several months.

 

4. Project Management

 

4.1 Project Management Overview and Key Accomplishments

 

The Project Manager continues to exert proper management control over the project.

 

4.2 Project Management Status and Plans

 

The project continues to be effectively managed. The fact that the projected delivery date has not changed significantly in almost three years since the current Project Manager was assigned to the project reflects the pressure the Project Manager is keeping on the staff to maintain the schedule. This is paying off in maintenance of the budget as well.

 

4.3 Project Management Problems and Concerns

 

The major issue facing the Project Manager is the late delivery of the OIWFS. This subsystem is needed to obtain the full range of performance and capabilities from the instrument. It will reach the Critical Path in August, at which point there will be a day for day slip of the GNIRS delivery date if the team waits for the delivery of the OIWFS before proceeding. The Project Manager has been tasked by the NOAO Director with development of a contingency plan for proceeding without the OIWFS, should it not be available.

 

The labor wave issue mentioned in previous QR’s appears to be partly an artifact of the way MS Project is used by the project for task scheduling. As stated above, USGP recommends that the source of the wave be investigated.

 

At this stage of the project, fabrication problems will always be a concern, both problems of delays caused by vendors, and delays caused by the need to rework parts that don’t fit together.

 

Two other items noted above are the IFU and flexure rig. These are not under the direct control of the Project Manager. It now appears certain that the IFU will be late, so the Project Manager is proceeding on that assumption and will make mass models that will be inserted into the instrument in place of the IFU modules. If the flexure rig is late, flexure testing will be performed on the telescope, at the risk of having to make corrections far from the home institution where engineering talent and machine shop resources reside.

 

4.4 Project Management Schedule

 

The Project Manager usually delivers reports on schedule and meets his other schedule obligations.

 

4.5 Project Management Budget and  Expenditures to Date

 

The GNIRS Statement of Work does not require this WBS element to be reported separately to the USGP.

 

4.6 Project Management Organization

 

The GNIRS Project Management organization consists of Neil Gaughan (Project Manager), Dan Eklund (assigned half time as Project Assistant), and Melissa Bowersock (Administrative Assistant to the Project Manager).

 

5. Systems Engineering

 

5.1 Systems Engineering Overview and Key Accomplishments

 

None – this activity is complete.

 

5.2 Systems Engineering Status and Plans

 

Systems engineering was reported as being 100% complete, however, the final reports for the rotary and linear prototypes are still not written. From this point on, systems engineering activity will consist of sustaining engineering support to the other engineering staff.

 

5.3 Systems Engineering Problems and Concerns

 

None

 

5.4 Systems Engineering Schedule

 

No further systems engineering work is scheduled. However, USGP still expects the final prototype reports to be written, as a service to the Gemini instrument community.

 

5.5 Systems Engineering Budget and  Expenditures to Date

 

The GNIRS Statement of Work does not require this WBS element to be reported separately to the USGP.

 

5.6 Systems Engineering Organization

 

The GNIRS systems engineering group consists of Jay Elias (GNIRS Instrument Scientist and lead systems engineer), Dick Joyce (KPNO IR spectroscopist) , and Brook Gregory (CTIO instrument scientist).

 

6. Optics Design

 

The optics design is complete. All further optical work is in the area of procurement, installation, alignment, and integration.

 

7. Optics Fabrication

All optics fabrication is being performed by outside contractors. Optical procurement is 71% complete.

As noted elsewhere, although the BaF2 issue was addressed, and is no longer a major concern. Due to the fragile nature of this material, there is the potential for a schedule delay until the last lens is in hand. The former issue with the MgF Wollaston prisms was resolved, as well, though NOAO was not able to find a vendor capable of delivering a unit with full performance. The solution offered by NOAO was acceptable to IGPO, so NOAO proceeded with the procurement.

 

8. Mechanical Design

 

8.1 Mechanical Design Overview and Key Accomplishments

 

Completed design for mechanisms and benches, and made significant progress on fixed assemblies. In addition, the design of the fixed assemblies was brought forward significantly, with considerable work done on the bulkhead assembly, dewar shell covers, and mounting trusses for both the instrument and the electronic thermal enclosures. This led to a more refined understanding of the overall instrument envelope, and a request for a waiver from IGPO for a small amount of space near the ISS for the electronic enclosure mounting trusses, and for permitting removable rear lifting trusses. IGPO granted this waiver, which permitted the design to go forward.

 

8.2 Mechanical Design Status and Plans

 

Mechanical design and fabrication (which are reported together) are 70% complete overall with benches 70% complete, mechanisms 84%, and fixed assemblies 36%. The current status (as of the QR date) of the design of fixed assemblies is that 10 of 19 are complete.

Plans for the next QR are to have all 3D and 2D designs complete.

8.3 Mechanical Design Problems and Concerns

 

Design drafting is still on the Critical Path, and is affecting the rate at which work can be placed into the NOAO shop or outside shops. During the prior quarter, the drafting staff dropped from 5 to 4, and during this quarter, one of the remaining 4 had a family emergency and was out for an extended period. After an extensive search for qualified individuals who know the drafting package being used and who can work at NOAO to use the drawings on the server, it became clear that no one could be hired in time to make a significant difference in the start of subsystem integration.

 

8.4 Mechanical Design Schedule

 

The fixed assemblies are about 5.5 months behind schedule, varying widely from the entrance window, which is complete, to a few assemblies that have not been started. The Project Manager addressed this problem by stating that the most difficult assemblies were addressed first, so the remaining ones should go more quickly, and should be completed during the coming quarter.

 

The one large item is the Bulkhead Assembly, which is on the Critical Path. This is a large, complex assembly that supports the main bench on the inside, and to which is attached the truss holding the instrument to the ISS. All the electronics cables go through this assembly, as well as the cryo heads. It must maintain a high vacuum and be light-tight. Thus it has major structural, electronic, and thermal design issues that affect the performance of the instrument. This item is behind schedule, and early fabrication estimates from likely vendors put it considerably over budget. The status of this item will be a topic at the next QR.

 

8.5 Mechanical Design Budget and  Expenditures to Date

 

The GNIRS Statement of Work does not require this WBS element to be reported separately to the USGP.

 

8.6 Mechanical Design Organization

 

The GNIRS mechanical engineering group consists of Ed Hileman (benches and fixed assemblies) and Gary Muller (mechanisms and engineering management systems). The mechanical design group consists of John Andrew (lead), Dave Rosin, Eric Downey, and Dale Circle.

 

9. Mechanical Fabrication

 

9.1 Mechanical Fabrication Overview and Key Accomplishments

 

Fabrication is complete on all but 2 mechanisms. The OIWFS bench is complete, the Post-Slit bench is 69% complete overall, and the pre-slit bench is 81% complete. Of the 19 fixed assemblies, the entrance window fabrication is complete, 8 are in fabrication, and the rest are in design.

 

9.2 Mechanical Fabrication Status and Plans

 

Fabrication status is not reported separately from design (see above). By the next QR, all mechanisms should be fabricated and assembled, and most dewar components should be fabricated. Not all fixed assembly fabrication will be complete, however. This is not anticipated to affect subsystem or system integration activities, or the final instrument delivery date.

 

9.3 Mechanical Fabrication Problems and Concerns

 

The cost of sending parts to outside shops for fabrication is several times higher than using the NOAO shop. At the project restart, the Project Manager was promised four instrument makers but initially was given only two, forcing him to use outside shops that increased his costs over initial estimates by factors of three or more. Some cost growth over initial estimates would have been likely had the NOAO shop been used, but since NOAO rates are lower, factors of three or more were unlikely.  Although the instrument maker staff assigned full time to GNIRS was increased to the promised level of four, now only two of these will be used for fabrication and two for mechanical assembly. The project did not have a full complement of four instrument makers, as promised, for an extended period of time, which forced it to use mostly outside shops for parts fabrication. As predicted at the last QR, this added another $200k to the cost of the instrument.

 

Use of outside shops increases the path, and hence the difficulty, of communications. Therefore, vendor delays are more likely, partly due to miscommunications and their unfamiliarity with our

drawings and procedures.

 

Another concern is that using unknown and unproven outside machine shops introduces an unknown level of risk for parts rework during the subsystem assembly phase. Although attempts were made to pre-qualify all outside machine shops before giving them critical assemblies to machine, NOAO has not used outside shops for instrumentation to this extent before. Consequently, the Project Manager has no basis for estimating the amount of rework that will be needed in his schedule.

 

To balance these concerns, there are benefits of using outside shops, such as gaining access to labor (in quantity), particular skills, machine tools, facilities, and capabilities we don’t have at NOAO. An example of this is the ability to cut the large aluminum billet and to heat treat the post-slit optical bench, processes we could not do in the NOAO instrument shop.

 

9.4 Mechanical Fabrication Schedule

 

Overall, the Project Summary Schedule shows bench assemblies with mounted and aligned components to be 3 months behind schedule, mechanisms to have some items as much as 3.5 months behind schedule, and fixed assemblies to be 5.5 months behind schedule. The late delivery of the OIWFS components severely constrained NOAO’s ability to rework the schedule without delaying delivery, and could cause both an irrecoverable schedule slip and a further cost overrun.

 

9.5 Mechanical Fabrication Budget and  Expenditures to Date

 

The GNIRS Statement of Work does not require this WBS element to be reported separately to the USGP.

 

9.6 Mechanical Fabrication Organization

Mechanical parts fabrication will be performed by a combination of outside machine shops and the NOAO instrument shop. The latter will assemble and check out each subassembly. The NOAO instrument makers assigned to GNIRS include John Stein, Randy Bennett, Lou Lederer, and Ron Harris.

10. Electronics Design

 

10.1 Electronics Design Overview and Key Accomplishments

 

Electronics design is complete.

 

10.2 Electronics Design Status and Plans

 

Electronics design is complete.

 

10.3 Electronics Design Problems and Concerns

 

None.

 

10.4 Electronics Design Schedule

 

Electronics design is complete.

 

10.5 Electronics Design Budget and Expenditures to Date

 

The GNIRS Statement of Work does not require this WBS element to be reported separately to the USGP.

 

10.6 Electronics Design Organization

 

The GNIRS electrical engineer is Jerry Penegor. He is assisted by electronics technician Ron George.

 

11. Electronics Fabrication

 

11.1 Electronics Fabrication Overview and Key Accomplishments

 

Fabrication of cold station PCB’s is complete. Fabrication of the components controller thermal enclosure is nearly complete.

 

11.2 Electronics Fabrication Status and Plans

 

All board schematics are drawn and released. All PCB’s are laid out and etched, including 7 coldstation cards, motherboard for Phytron driver cards, hard stop board, and the hermetic connector adaptor PCB’s.

 

The connector panel for the enclosure is machined, the VME crate is built and is being used for S/W development, the Phytron crate is in fabrication, and the ancillary crate is ready for fabrication. All PCB’s are fabricated, and most are loaded.

 

By the next QR, the team will have the remaining electronics fabrication complete, except for internal dewar wiring. For example, by the next QR, the team will complete dewar to TE cabling fabrication

11.3 Electronics Fabrication Problems and Concerns

 

None.

 

11.4 Electronics Fabrication Schedule

 

Electronics fabrication is about 1 month behind schedule.

 

11.5 Electronics Fabrication Budget and Expenditures to Date

 

The GNIRS Statement of Work does not require this WBS element to be reported separately to the USGP.

 

11.6 Electronics Fabrication Organization

 

The GNIRS electrical engineer is Jerry Penegor, assisted by electronics technician Ron George.

 

12. Software Design

 

12.1 Software Design Overview and Key Accomplishments

 

The software design is essentially complete.

 

12.2 Software Design Status and Plans

 

Overall the software design is quite similar to that used by NIRI, with the exception that actual component control is performed in ordinary C software instead of EPICS software written in C.

The design is mature and well-understood.

 

12.3 Software Design Problems and Concerns

 

None

 

12.4 Software Design Schedule

 

The software design is essentially complete.

 

12.5 Software Design Budget and Expenditures to Date

 

The GNIRS Statement of Work does not require this WBS element to be reported separately to the USGP.

 

12.6 Software Design Organization

 

The GNIRS software engineer is Richard Wolff with EPICS software provided by Peter Ruckle. This will change upon Dr. Wolff’s retirement in a few months.

 

13. Software Fabrication

 

13.1 Software Fabrication Overview and Key Accomplishments

 

Since the previous QR, the DHS simulator was delivered.

 

13.2 Software Fabrication Status and Plans

 

Overall, the software is 63% complete and is about 1 month behind schedule according to the GNIRS Project Summary Schedule. The Components Controller is 91% complete, but was scheduled to have been completed at the end of January. The Lab Support software is 6% complete. The EPICS code, which is missing from the Project Summary Schedule, is 70% complete. Although the software is behind schedule, it is not on the Critical Path, in the judgment of the Work Package Manager. The Project Manager reports software to be under control.

 

13.3 Software Fabrication Problems and Concerns

 

The GNIRS software engineer, Richard Wolff, will be retiring in autumn of 2001. He will be replaced by Peter Ruckle, who will be assigned full-time to GNIRS. Although no problems are expected and USGP expects the transition to be smooth, Richard’s expertise and experience will be missed during critical debugging sessions. USGP understands that Dr. Wolff may do consulting with NOAO and recommends that this arrangement be put in place before the critical system integration and testing phases begin.

 

Two questions remain from the Mid-Fabrication Review that have not been addressed by the GNIRS Team:

 

USGP sent these issues to the Project Manager well in advance of the QR and requested a response to the Mid-Fabrication Review report, but no response was received. Shortly before the QR, the USGP met with the Project Manager and discussed items to be covered at the QR, including these specific items. Unfortunately, these items were not covered at the QR. USGP requests, once again, that the Project Manager respond promptly in writing to the specific software bullets in the Mid-Fabrication Review report. These responses will be discussed at the next QR.

 

13.4 Software Fabrication Schedule

 

The software fabrication is about 1 month behind schedule, due to the software engineer’s being assigned to other Gemini work. That was recently completed, so now rapid progress is expected to be made. USGP expects the schedule to be recovered in full and will review this at the next QR.

 

13.5 Software Fabrication Budget and Expenditures to Date

 

The GNIRS Statement of Work does not require this WBS element to be reported separately to the USGP.

 

13.6 Software Fabrication Organization

 

The GNIRS software engineer is Richard Wolff with EPICS software provided by Peter Ruckle. This will change, as noted above, upon Dr. Wolff’s retirement in a few months.

 

14. Subsystem Integration

 

14.1 Subsystem Integration Overview and Key Accomplishments

The major planned subsystem integration activity was the OIWFS optical bench. IGPO is late in delivering the OIWFS parts, which were due September 5, 2000. USGP delivered a Change Order to IGPO in accordance with Amendment 4 of the GNIRS Work Scope. OIWFS bench subsystem integration should have begun in September, according to the schedule. The bench itself was not ready until December, 2000. However, the parts will not be delivered until well after the time scheduled for OIWFS bench integration, which will delay the project. This will most likely cause a cost and schedule impact to the project.

Other subsystem integration activities planned to have begun in April did not begin, primarily because the parts were not available. The schedule was reworked to accommodate this delay.

14.2 Subsystem Integration Status and Plans

The plans for the OIWFS and IFU given in the previous QR report were to wait until May or June to determine their status. It now appears the IFU will not be available in time, and the OIWFS is slipping daily. As a result, the subsystem integration schedule was reworked to begin in July to try to accommodate these changes, as well as delays in the fabrication schedule.

14.3 Subsystem Integration Problems and Concerns

See above.

14.4 Subsystem Integration Schedule

See above. Alignment and integration were due to begin April 1, but due to the delays mentioned above, these activities are 3 months late, and have been rescheduled to begin in July.

14.5 Subsystem Integration Budget and  Expenditures to Date

The GNIRS Statement of Work does not require this WBS element to be reported separately to the USGP.

14.6 Subsystem Integration Organization

Various engineers and technicians perform subsystem integration, depending on which subsystem it is.

15. System Integration

 

No system integration was scheduled to begin before the Quarterly Review.

 

16. Test and Checkout

No test and checkout tasks were scheduled to begin before the Quarterly Review. The previous QR report contained a quote from the Mid-Fabrication Review Committee urging the team to conduct careful flexure tests. The NOAO Director recently decided to participate in the Gemini purchase of a flexure rig. It is now up to IGPO to deliver this rig in time for NOAO to install it by the GNIRS need date of February, 2002.

17. Documentation and Training

 

17.1 Documentation and Training Overview and Key Accomplishments

Work began on electronics documentation.

17.2 Documentation and Training Status and Plans

Electronics documentation is about 1 month behind schedule. By the next QR, this task should be back on schedule.

17.3 Documentation and Training Problems and Concerns

As described in Section 3.2, the Acceptance Test Plan is late. The Team should begin work on this important document immediately. Experience with other US Gemini instrument teams has shown that several iterations of the document are required for IGPO and USGP approval of the format and content of the document.

17.4 Documentation and Training Schedule

The electronics documentation task is 13% complete.

17.5 Documentation and Training Budget and  Expenditures to Date

 

The GNIRS Statement of Work does not require this WBS element to be reported separately to the USGP.

 

17.6 Documentation and Training Organization

 

For electronics documentation, the responsible parties are the GNIRS electrical engineer, Jerry Penegor, assisted by electronics technician Ron George.

 

18. Other Activities

 

No tasks for other activities were scheduled to begin before the Quarterly Review.

 

 

Home | Management | System Design Notes | Requirements | Configuration Images | Subsystems | Archives | Staff | FTP Site | Internal Information |

If you have any questions or suggestions regarding this website, please contact Melissa Bowersock.
NOAO Intranet Services
NOAO Copyright
 Statement

National Optical Astronomy Observatories, 950 North Cherry Avenue, P.O. Box 26732, Tucson, Arizona 85726,
Phone: (520) 318-8000, Fax: (520) 318-8360